The Error of KJV-Onlyism

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

jamessb

Active member
Feb 10, 2024
738
121
43
Santa Fe NM
With all due respect, the blurb at the front of a Bible isn't necessarily the best place to get an objective idea of what it really is. You can get some information like sources and translation philosophy that's helpful; but you have to remember they're trying to sell Bibles, so I look at most of it as advertising. The marketing department is going to put the best possible spin on it. You have to look elsewhere to get the facts and the truth.
And where do you suggest someone can find the facts and the truth? Everyone has a motive, including reviewers and critics. I believe that the preface of a Bible is an honest statement. Of course they are trying to justify their research and methods; would you expect anything different?

In this case, it is blatantly obvious that Bible Highlighter is so biased that he cannot be taken seriously.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
I would ask anyone who is interested in a particular translation to read the introduction. Each Bible has an introduction that clearly demonstrates the intention, the methodology employed, the sources referenced, etc.

It is patently absurd to claim the kind of foolishness that Bible Highlighter claims about modern translations. I feel sorry for him; his thinking is clearly deluded.

I remember well the advice a professor of mine gave in graduate school: try to prove yourself wrong, as others will surely do so. When you read the claims of Bible Highlighter and others, a) ask yourself the actual purpose of those claims and b) verify them on your own.

Personally, I trust the excellent scholarship that his given us a wide variety of Bible translations. There is at least one translation that suits a person's reading level, comprehension level, etc. so that God can clearly communicate His words and thoughts to you.

As I have recommended before, go to a site such as biblegateway.com and read selections from the various translations, then decide which one most clearly communicates God message to you personally.

Don't let "know it alls" decide which translation is best for you. God can clearly do that without their help.
This is a bad argument. The Bible itself teaches that God can use people for His purposes despite them knowing it. Look at the cross. I highly doubt the Romans and the Jews knew they were helping to aid our Savior in paying the price for the sins of the whole world to offer mankind the free gift of salvation.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
In case anyone is interested in the publishers' greed that Bible Highlighter claims, there isn't a single print version of the King James Bible that is free. (Source: Amazon)
You're missing the point. Monetary kickbacks by copyrights on Modern Bibles means that they make money selling the translation rights to make another translation, or they make money via digital products and or printed works. The copyrights allow them to maintain control to make money. This is not anything new. It allows them to make an additional profit. Thus, they peddle the Word of God. If you have an NIV: You cannot quote more than 500 verses at one time without permission unless you desire to break the Law. That’s greedy. God’s Word cannot be copyrighted. The Word of God is not bound.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
And where do you suggest someone can find the facts and the truth? Everyone has a motive, including reviewers and critics. I believe that the preface of a Bible is an honest statement. Of course they are trying to justify their research and methods; would you expect anything different?

In this case, it is blatantly obvious that Bible Highlighter is so biased that he cannot be taken seriously.
And you are not without your own biases? You appear to deny the Trinity, and the deity of Jesus Christ. Modern Bibles remove all direct references of the Trinity, and they water-down the deity of Jesus Christ. This sets well with you. So you have motive to defend them.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
You are implying that the difference in sources results in "Modern Bibles" teaching false doctrines. That's a non sequitur.
I've already demonstrated the false doctrines in Modern Bibles just recently with a link to my posts that shows them. These changes are for the worse and not for the better. These changed doctrines COMBINED with the fact they are based upon corrupted / corrected manuscripts shows that the Modern Bible Movement is clearly false and in error.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,777
13,412
113
In case anyone is interested in the publishers' greed that Bible Highlighter claims, there isn't a single print version of the King James Bible that is free. (Source: Amazon)
Also, the KJV was originally published under the contemporary equivalent of a copyright. It's a non-argument.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
7,608
3,192
113
And where do you suggest someone can find the facts and the truth? Everyone has a motive, including reviewers and critics. I believe that the preface of a Bible is an honest statement. Of course they are trying to justify their research and methods; would you expect anything different?
Some people are motivated by truth, though you might have to look a little harder to find the truth nowadays. You can either do your homework or settle for the easiest path, it's up to you.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,777
13,412
113
I've already demonstrated the false doctrines in Modern Bibles just recently with a link to my posts that shows them. These changes are for the worse and not for the better. These changed doctrines COMBINED with the fact they are based upon corrupted / corrected manuscripts shows that the Modern Bible Movement is clearly false and in error.
Wrong.

You made a fallacious argument.

Despite using the phrase "Modern Bibles" ad nauseam, you have never demonstrated that there is consistency of purpose nor of wording that supports your claim of "false doctrines". Comparing the wording of the KJV with the wording of another version DOES NOT and NEVER WILL show "false doctrine". What it will show is DIFFERENCE.

Doctrines are not (or, at least, should not be) built on single verses. Differences in the wording of single verses does not demonstrate that a particular version "teaches" a false doctrine. It is far more likely that the "doctrine" is actually amply supported in the "offending" version, but you (as do most KJV-only advocates) choose to overlook that so you can support your rants.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
Thank for the laugh! :D

Everything that you wrote here is absurd. Clearly you have no interest in the truth! (That is so sad! Jesus said the same thing about the Pharisees, who were so stuck in their own "truth" that they couldn't see Christ as divine.
Oh, so you believe Jesus is God?
Do you believe Jesus is the second person of the Godhead or Trinity?
Do you believe we can worship Jesus who is God?

You said:
a) I don't need to prove anything. I have stated facts. If you can't accept them, that is your problem, not mine., Your posts (plural) are clearly biased; they are nothing more than propaganda!
Look in the mirror. You are also pushing you are own propaganda machine.

You said:
b) You are clearly writing your posts mindlessly because you don’t like the idea that other Bibles besides the King James translation -- a political document -- are the word of God. You claim to be an authority but anyone with a small amount of insight can see right through your false statements.
Not at all. I base my arguments on solid reasons. Biblical, textual, historical, etcetera. You are the one who is mindlessly arguing here. How about I challenge you.
I would like for you to ask GOD and what His opinion is on this topic.
I am not asking you to talk to GOD to confirm what you want to be true and then you move on.
No, no. I want you to be open to the possibility that maybe you could be wrong and GOD knows better.
If there is even a 1% chance you may be wrong, wouldn't it worth it to talk to GOD about this?

You said:
I don't know what you have against modern Bibles!
Uh, you gave an award rep to Resident Alien's post about how Westcott and Hort employed stealth (deception) involving their Revised Version and you wonder why I have a problem? Your moral compass is broken if you cannot connect the dots.

You said:
They are the result of hard work by qualified men and women to give us the best possible translations in our own native language. Thou thinkest because the version thou likest is written in olde Englyshe it is somehow more true to the source documents. That is utter nonsense. You have been deluded! Some time in the past you must have seized on the idea that the KJV is perfect, and have then manufactured all kinds of reasoning to justify your premise. But there is not one iota of proof in what you write!
Obviously it takes faith to believe the Bible. The Bible itself teaches that His words are pure and they would be preserved forever. You have to believe that by faith. Just as we believe the resurrection by faith. I cannot demonstrate how the resurrection is factually true whereby it would not require faith for a person. You have to believe the Bible first. This is what this discussion is really about. Faith in what God's Word says. You prefer instead the translation theories or guesses that come out of German Rationalism.

You said:
A clear example of your biased nonsense is this statement: "The NIV website says you cannot quote more than 500 verses in any form (including audio, which is speaking). First, this just sounds greedy and controlling." Greedy and controlling? Seriously? Obviously you don't realize that the King James Bibles that you buy today are copyrighted! The KJV publishers are just as "greedy" as the NIV publisher. My King James translation, the Thompson Chain Bible, has this notice: "Copyright 1964 by B.B. Kirkbride Bible Co, Inc." Also, "Previous Editions Copyright 1908, 1917, 1929, 1934, 1957 by Frank Charles Thompson ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THROUGHOUT THE WORLD" How greedy can you get??? I've got news for you: every Bible publisher is in it for profit! They all sell their translations with the idea of making as much money as possible! In the case of the above, they don't even permit 500 verses!
Uh, they cannot claim copyright on the King James Bible. They are laying claim to the content that is added that is not the actual KJV translation itself. You would have to be highly uneducated or illogical to think that any average joe can come along and lay claim to copyrighting the KJV.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
Wrong.

You made a fallacious argument.

Despite using the phrase "Modern Bibles" ad nauseam, you have never demonstrated that there is consistency of purpose nor of wording that supports your claim of "false doctrines". Comparing the wording of the KJV with the wording of another version DOES NOT and NEVER WILL show "false doctrine". What it will show is DIFFERENCE.

Doctrines are not (or, at least, should not be) built on single verses. Differences in the wording of single verses does not demonstrate that a particular version "teaches" a false doctrine. It is far more likely that the "doctrine" is actually amply supported in the "offending" version, but you (as do most KJV-only advocates) choose to overlook that so you can support your rants.
Not at all. John 1:18 is clearly a false doctrine. God is not begotten. Micah 5:2 is another. Modern Bibles essentially say that the Messiah is not from everlasting like the KJV. Replacing 1 John 5:7 with certain words from 1 John 5:8 shows a deception to hide that there is a missing verse. But go ahead and color the facts as you desire to see them.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
Also, the KJV was originally published under the contemporary equivalent of a copyright. It's a non-argument.
No. The KJV did not have a copyright when it first was published in 1611. It was many years later that this happened. Just look that up at Google or Perplexity.ai.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
In case anyone is interested in the publishers' greed that Bible Highlighter claims, there isn't a single print version of the King James Bible that is free. (Source: Amazon)
It takes a lot of money to publish a Bible. If you wanted to even publish your own Bible, it would be super crazy expensive unless you did a multi-volume set.

In addition, if you wanted to make a Bible app using a Modern Bible, you would have to give them a cut of the profits. This is not the case with the King James Bible because it is in the public domain outside of the UK.

But think of all the Modern Bible apps that are out there. Think about how much money they are making.
 

jamessb

Active member
Feb 10, 2024
738
121
43
Santa Fe NM
Some people are motivated by truth, though you might have to look a little harder to find the truth nowadays. You can either do your homework or settle for the easiest path, it's up to you.
Can you be any more vague and/or cynical? I believe that most people, especially those involved in translating and publishing Bibles, are honest. I don't think that you have to look any harder for "the truth" (whatever you mean by that) today than at any other time. Why are you so distrustful? Do you consider that to be an appropriate attitude for a Christian?

To stay on the OP topic, I don't think that people who insist that the KJV is the only true translation have any basis for that claim. I can't believe that they actually think that the King James Bible is an accurate translation of the ancient sources, and that no other translation is. It is absurd to think that God decided one day that He would inspire a group of men who served a power-mad king to come up with a perfect translation, and that no other group before or since had that gift. Did God really decide that it was a one-time event and that He would never guide any other group? That is insane!
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
Can you be any more vague and/or cynical? I believe that most people, especially those involved in translating and publishing Bibles, are honest. I don't think that you have to look any harder for "the truth" (whatever you mean by that) today than at any other time. Why are you so distrustful? Do you consider that to be an appropriate attitude for a Christian?

To stay on the OP topic, I don't think that people who insist that the KJV is the only true translation have any basis for that claim. I can't believe that they actually think that the King James Bible is an accurate translation of the ancient sources, and that no other translation is. It is absurd to think that God decided one day that He would inspire a group of men who served a secular king to come up with a perfect translation, and that no other group before or since had that gift. Did God really decide that it was a one-time event and that He would never guide any other group? That is insane!
All Modern Bibles are trustworthy except for the King James Bible? I would say that is an insane statement to make. Then again you need to research the facts and follow them towards the truth. But I don’t think you are that kind of person at this point in time of your life. I pray that will change of course.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
7,608
3,192
113
Can you be any more vague and/or cynical? I believe that most people, especially those involved in translating and publishing Bibles, are honest. I don't think that you have to look any harder for "the truth" (whatever you mean by that) today than at any other time. Why are you so distrustful? Do you consider that to be an appropriate attitude for a Christian?
LOL, later man. Life's too short.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
Side Note: Update: Meant to say that you need to pay a fee to create a Bible app for profit using a Modern Bible. This fee can range from hundreds to thousands of dollars depending on the translation. So I was incorrect that all Modern Bibles share in the profits. This may be different on select translation that I am not aware of. They make money based on charging you fees.

However, the Word of God is not bound.

If you make a Bible app using the KJV, you don’t have to pay any company a fee.
 

jamessb

Active member
Feb 10, 2024
738
121
43
Santa Fe NM
Unlike some, my faith is not rooted in any single translation. I believe that almost all translations (with very few exceptions) are valid expressions of God's message to humanity. To me, it is sad that some people are so rooted in one single translation that isn't even written in their normal language that they find it necessary to disparage other translations. My faith is rooted in God. God can use whatever means He wants, including a donkey(!) to convey His words to people.

I don't know what it is that motivates King James people to disparage other translations. By far the great majority of translations convey God's message to His creation. Never forget that Jesus came in the form of a common man, not in the form of a high priest. He was a man of the people, and the people loved Him! Does anyone seriously think they would have the same attitude to a "high priest"?

The same principle holds true for Bible translation. It doesn't have to be written in some "exalted" (long-dead) language that was the common language of the people in 17th Century England. Give me a Bible written in the language that I use everyday, one that gives the clearest understanding of God's message. That should be the goal of every Bible reader!
 

jamessb

Active member
Feb 10, 2024
738
121
43
Santa Fe NM
LOL, later man. Life's too short.
Thanks for the non-answer! Again...

Can you be any more vague and/or cynical? I believe that most people, especially those involved in translating and publishing Bibles, are honest. I don't think that you have to look any harder for "the truth" (whatever you mean by that) today than at any other time. Why are you so distrustful? Do you consider that to be an appropriate attitude for a Christian?

How about a reasonable reply? You have made a cynical statement about Bible translators. Why do you expect anyone to accept your viewpoint? Or is life really to short for you to have a reasonable discussion?
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
7,608
3,192
113
"If a snake bites before you charm it, what’s the use of being a snake charmer?" Ecclesiates 10:11
 

jamessb

Active member
Feb 10, 2024
738
121
43
Santa Fe NM
"If a snake bites before you charm it, what’s the use of being a snake charmer?" Ecclesiates 10:11
"Your eye is the lamp of your body. When you eyes are healthy, your whole body is also full of light. But when they are unhealthy, your body also is full of darkness. See to it then, that the light within you is not darkness. Therefore, if your whole body is full of light, and no part of it dark, it will be just as full of light as when a lamp shines it light on you." Luke 11:34-36

Pay attention to the above. It's way better than your present cynicism!